Revelation 12

[bones_IV]

Partly True. The woman can be referred to the Church, and she also represents Mary.

Because this woman gave birth to a male child who will rule all nations. This child was taken up to God and to his throne. This male child is Jesus.

The Father’s of the Church didn’t say that. Wasn’t Mary preserved from original sin?

 

[NotWorthy]

Revelations 12 to me doesn’t refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. It refers to Mother Church. The crown of twelve stars would stand for the 12 apostles upon which the Church was built. She experienced pain while giving birth (the Church teaches that Mary didn’t experience pain while giving birth.) So therefore the child that rules with an iron rod couldn’t then be Christ but the holy father perhaps?

How could the child be anyone other than Jesus.

Doesn’t this echo the Psalms 2:9.

*** “I myself have installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain.”****** 7 ****** I will proclaim the decree of the LORD, who said to me, “You are my son; today I am your father.****** 8 ****** Only ask it of me, and I will make your inheritance the nations, your possession the ends of the earth.****** 9 ****** With an iron rod you shall shepherd them***, like a clay pot you will shatter them.”

Isn’t Jesus the child who was caught up to heaven?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Partly True. The woman can be referred to the Church, and she also represents Mary.
…

Could you kindly quote some church fathers on that? Any authoritive sources?

Thanks

p067.ezboard.com/Whats-truly-the-catholic-postion-on-Rev-12-Gen-316/fthetruth11187frm2.showMessage?topicID=1167.topic

 

[bones_IV]

How could the child be anyone other than Jesus.

Doesn’t this echo the Psalms 2:9. Isn’t Jesus the child who was caught up to heaven?

The “rod of iron” would mean law enforcement or divine chastisement according to Father Kramer.

For example Revelations 11:1 1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and it was said to me: Arise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar and them that adore therein.

The good will accept the divine laws but the wicked will rebel and apostatize. And another thing is Christ came to save not judge.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken away from distress, and from judgment: who shall declare his generation? because he is cut off out of the land of the living: for the wickedness of my people have I struck him.

Isaiah is writing of the death of Christ which *took Him away from the power of His enemies. Christ was not killed at his birth, and He didn’t ascend into heaven immediately after his death, as the text in Rev 12:5 implies.
*
12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne.

He didn’t ascend to the throne of God in order to escape the dragon. After his resurrection, Satan and all the power of hell kept out of His way.

Methodius writes:

“John speaks concerning things present and things to come. But Christ long ago conceived, was not caught up to the throne of God when He was brought forth, from fear of the serpent’s injuring Him” (Banq of 10 virgins; Dis VIII. chap vii.)

The words “and to his throne” point to Rev 20:4 and 6

Revelations 20:4 And I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Revelations 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection. In these the second death hath no power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ; and shall reign with him a thousand years.

So this “son” would have to be a Pope.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Could you kindly quote some church fathers on that? Any authoritive sources?

Thanks

p067.ezboard.com/Whats-truly-the-catholic-postion-on-Rev-12-Gen-316/fthetruth11187frm2.showMessage?topicID=1167.topic

Hippolytus
Hippolytus says that the woman of Revelation 12 is the church. He says that this interpretation is “most manifest”, and he contradicts numerous details of the Marian interpretation:

“By the woman then clothed with the sun, he meant most manifestly the Church, endued with the Father’s word, whose brightness is above the sun. And by the ‘moon under her feet’ he referred to her being adorned, like the moon, with heavenly glory. And the words, ‘upon her head a crown of twelve stars,’ refer to the twelve apostles by whom the Church was founded. And those, ‘she, being with child, cries, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered,’ mean that the Church will not cease to bear from her heart the Word that is persecuted by the unbelieving in the world. ‘And she brought forth,’ he says, ‘a man-child, who is to rule all the nations;’ by which is meant that the Church, always bringing forth Christ, the perfect man-child of God, who is declared to be God and man, becomes the instructor of all the nations. And the words, ‘her child was caught up unto God and to His throne,’ signify that he who is always born of her is a heavenly king, and not an earthly; even as David also declared of old when he said, ‘The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.’ ‘And the dragon,’ he says, ‘saw and persecuted the woman which brought forth the man-child. And to the woman were given two wings of the great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.’ That refers to the one thousand two hundred and threescore days (the half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and persecute the Church, which flees from city to city, and seeks conceal-meat in the wilderness among the mountains, possessed of no other defence than the two wings of the great eagle, that is to say, the faith of Jesus Christ, who, in stretching forth His holy hands on the holy tree, unfolded two wings, the right and the left, and called to Him all who believed upon Him, and covered them as a hen her chickens. For by the mouth of Malachi also He speaks thus: ‘And unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in His wings.’” (Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 61)

 

[bones_IV]

Hippolytus
Hippolytus says that the woman of Revelation 12 is the church. He says that this interpretation is “most manifest”, and he contradicts numerous details of the Marian interpretation:

“By the woman then clothed with the sun, he meant most manifestly the Church, endued with the Father’s word, whose brightness is above the sun. And by the ‘moon under her feet’ he referred to her being adorned, like the moon, with heavenly glory. And the words, ‘upon her head a crown of twelve stars,’ refer to the twelve apostles by whom the Church was founded. And those, ‘she, being with child, cries, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered,’ mean that the Church will not cease to bear from her heart the Word that is persecuted by the unbelieving in the world. ‘And she brought forth,’ he says, ‘a man-child, who is to rule all the nations;’ by which is meant that the Church, always bringing forth Christ, the perfect man-child of God, who is declared to be God and man, becomes the instructor of all the nations. And the words, ‘her child was caught up unto God and to His throne,’ signify that he who is always born of her is a heavenly king, and not an earthly; even as David also declared of old when he said, ‘The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.’ ‘And the dragon,’ he says, ‘saw and persecuted the woman which brought forth the man-child. And to the woman were given two wings of the great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.’ That refers to the one thousand two hundred and threescore days (the half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and persecute the Church, which flees from city to city, and seeks conceal-meat in the wilderness among the mountains, possessed of no other defence than the two wings of the great eagle, that is to say, the faith of Jesus Christ, who, in stretching forth His holy hands on the holy tree, unfolded two wings, the right and the left, and called to Him all who believed upon Him, and covered them as a hen her chickens. For by the mouth of Malachi also He speaks thus: ‘And unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in His wings.’” (Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 61)

Thanks.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Could you kindly quote some church fathers on that? Any authoritive sources?

Thanks

p067.ezboard.com/Whats-truly-the-catholic-postion-on-Rev-12-Gen-316/fthetruth11187frm2.showMessage?topicID=1167.topic

I’ll look it up.

There has been apparitions like the Fatima, where Mary said, “I am the woman clothed with the sun.”

Second, there are many paintings with Mary have her wearing a crown with twelve stars and a moon underneath her feet.

I’m not denying the fact that the Church isn’t the woman in Rev 12.

I am saying that the woman represent Mary, the Church, and Israel. All of which are all correct.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Methodius writes:

“John speaks concerning things present and things to come. But Christ long ago conceived, was not caught up to the throne of God when He was brought forth, from fear of the serpent’s injuring Him” (Banq of 10 virgins; Dis VIII. chap vii.)

So this “son” would have to be a Pope.

Methodius

Pope Pius XII approvingly wrote:

“Moreover, the scholastic Doctors have recognized the Assumption of the Virgin Mother of God as something signified, not only in various figures of the Old Testament, but also in that woman clothed with the sun whom John the Apostle contemplated on the Island of Patmos.” (Munificentissimus Deus)

Roman Catholics often claim that the woman in Revelation 12 is Mary, even though the latter part of the chapter speaks about events, including events of the end times, which didn’t occur during Mary’s life. Even if we view the woman as Mary, the passage doesn’t logically lead to the Assumption of Mary, a doctrine for which the passage is often cited.

The church father Methodius says that the woman is the church, not Mary. He refers to the correct view of the woman, so he doesn’t seem to have thought that there were multiple correct interpretations. Apparently, he thought it would be incorrect to view the woman as Mary:

"The woman who appeared in heaven clothed with the sun, and crowned with twelve stars, and having the moon for her footstool, and being with child, and travailing in birth, is certainly, according to the accurate interpretation, our mother, O virgins, being a power by herself distinct from her children; whom the prophets, according to the aspect of their subjects, have called sometimes Jerusalem, sometimes a Bride, sometimes Mount Zion, and sometimes the Temple and Tabernacle of God. For she is the power which is desired to give light in the prophet, the Spirit crying to her: ‘Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and His glory shall be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round about, and see; all they gather themselves together, they come to thee: thy sons shall come from far, and thy daughters shall be nursed at thy side.’ It is the Church whose children shall come to her with all speed after the resurrection, running to her from all quarters." (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 8:5)
Not only did Methodius not view the woman as Mary, but he didn’t even think that the child is Christ. He describes the child in Revelation 12 as the people who are regenerated in baptism through the work of the church. He argues against those who think the child is Christ:

“The Church, then, stands upon our faith and adoption, under the figure of the moon, until the fulness of the nations come in, labouring and bringing forth natural men as spiritual men; for which reason too she is a mother. For just as a woman receiving tim unformed seed of a man, within a certain time brings forth a perfect man, in the same way, one should say, does the Church conceive those who flee to the Word, and, forming them according to the likeness and form of Christ, after a certain time produce them as citizens of that blessed state. Whence it is necessary that she should stand upon the laver, bringing forth those who are washed in it…If any one, for there is no difficulty in speaking distinctly, should be vexed, and reply to what we have said: ‘But how, O virgins, can this explanation seem to you to be according to the mind of Scripture, when the Apocalypse plainly defines that the Church brings forth a male, while you teach that her labour-pains have their fulfilment in those who are washed in the laver?’ We will answer, But, O faultfinder, not even to you will it be possible to show that Christ Himself is the one who is born. For long before the Apocalypse, the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word was fulfilled. And John speaks concerning things present and things to come. But Christ, long ago conceived, was not caught up to the throne of God when He was brought forth, from fear of the serpent injuring Him. But for this was He begotten, and Himself came down from the throne of the Father, that He should remain and subdue the dragon who made an assault upon the flesh. So that you also must confess that the Church labours and gives birth to those who are baptized.” (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 8:6-7)

Methodius disagreed with Pope Pius XII and Roman Catholicism’s modern apologists.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Methodius

Pope Pius XII approvingly wrote:

“Moreover, the scholastic Doctors have recognized the Assumption of the Virgin Mother of God as something signified, not only in various figures of the Old Testament, but also in that woman clothed with the sun whom John the Apostle contemplated on the Island of Patmos.” (Munificentissimus Deus)

Roman Catholics often claim that the woman in Revelation 12 is Mary, even though the latter part of the chapter speaks about events, including events of the end times, which didn’t occur during Mary’s life. Even if we view the woman as Mary, the passage doesn’t logically lead to the Assumption of Mary, a doctrine for which the passage is often cited.

The church father Methodius says that the woman is the church, not Mary. He refers to the correct view of the woman, so he doesn’t seem to have thought that there were multiple correct interpretations. Apparently, he thought it would be incorrect to view the woman as Mary:

"The woman who appeared in heaven clothed with the sun, and crowned with twelve stars, and having the moon for her footstool, and being with child, and travailing in birth, is certainly, according to the accurate interpretation, our mother, O virgins, being a power by herself distinct from her children; whom the prophets, according to the aspect of their subjects, have called sometimes Jerusalem, sometimes a Bride, sometimes Mount Zion, and sometimes the Temple and Tabernacle of God. For she is the power which is desired to give light in the prophet, the Spirit crying to her: ‘Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and His glory shall be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round about, and see; all they gather themselves together, they come to thee: thy sons shall come from far, and thy daughters shall be nursed at thy side.’ It is the Church whose children shall come to her with all speed after the resurrection, running to her from all quarters." (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 8:5)
Not only did Methodius not view the woman as Mary, but he didn’t even think that the child is Christ. He describes the child in Revelation 12 as the people who are regenerated in baptism through the work of the church. He argues against those who think the child is Christ:

“The Church, then, stands upon our faith and adoption, under the figure of the moon, until the fulness of the nations come in, labouring and bringing forth natural men as spiritual men; for which reason too she is a mother. For just as a woman receiving tim unformed seed of a man, within a certain time brings forth a perfect man, in the same way, one should say, does the Church conceive those who flee to the Word, and, forming them according to the likeness and form of Christ, after a certain time produce them as citizens of that blessed state. Whence it is necessary that she should stand upon the laver, bringing forth those who are washed in it…If any one, for there is no difficulty in speaking distinctly, should be vexed, and reply to what we have said: ‘But how, O virgins, can this explanation seem to you to be according to the mind of Scripture, when the Apocalypse plainly defines that the Church brings forth a male, while you teach that her labour-pains have their fulfilment in those who are washed in the laver?’ We will answer, But, O faultfinder, not even to you will it be possible to show that Christ Himself is the one who is born. For long before the Apocalypse, the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word was fulfilled. And John speaks concerning things present and things to come. But Christ, long ago conceived, was not caught up to the throne of God when He was brought forth, from fear of the serpent injuring Him. But for this was He begotten, and Himself came down from the throne of the Father, that He should remain and subdue the dragon who made an assault upon the flesh. So that you also must confess that the Church labours and gives birth to those who are baptized.” (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 8:6-7)

Methodius disagreed with Pope Pius XII and Roman Catholicism’s modern apologists.

I don’t see him denying the woman clothed with the sun as Mary.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Jimmy Akin puts a good explanation about the woman in Revelation 12:1

He explains:

She is Israel because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars. These symbols are drawn from Genesis 37:9–11, in which the patriarch Joseph has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers), which bow down to him. Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel.

The Woman is the Church because, as 12:17 tells us, “the rest of her offspring” are those who bear witness to Jesus, making them Christians.

The Woman is Eve because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus.

Finally, the Woman is Mary because she is the mother of Jesus, the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (19:11–16).

Because the Woman is a four-way symbol, different aspects of the narrative apply to different referents. Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s Assumption). Like the Church, she is persecuted by the Devil after the Ascension of Christ. Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with which the serpent has his primary conflict.

Conversely, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent. Mary did not experience literal pain when bringing forth the Messiah, but she suffered figuratively (the prophecy that a sword would pierce her heart at the Crucifixion). Eve did not ascend to heaven. And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9705chap.asp

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

bookmark if you have links to the sources that would be apricated too. thanks

 

[NotWorthy]

Bones IV, so you believe Methodius, and give him the teaching authority of the Church, even when he disagrees with the Pope?

I do not agree that the child born with a rod of Iron is not Jesus. The reference to someone with a reed like a rod is weak. The reference to Psalm 2:6-9 is strong, very strong. I think the child caught up to God is the Child Jesus. And I don’t see where the term “caught up to God” means that he was trying to escape the dragon. That’s drawing more than is there.

I think Methodius’ argument also fails when he tries to impose a linear time line on Revelation. This does not work. How many times it the dragon thrown down from heaven in Revelation? Isn’t it 2 or 3 times?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Jimmy Akin puts a good explanation about the woman in Revelation 12:1

He explains:

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9705chap.asp

Is Jimmy Akin, an authoritve source or is he just giving his opinion?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Is Jimmy Akin, an authoritve source or is he just giving his opinion?

Do you want a Vatican Document? I recommend reading the following link.

campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/documents/docs6-2m.html

It includes Vatican II Documents, LG, SM, RM, and so forth.

 

[Zooey]

Roman Catholics often claim that the woman in Revelation 12 is Mary, even though the latter part of the chapter speaks about events, including events of the end times, which didn’t occur during Mary’s life. Even if we view the woman as Mary, the passage doesn’t logically lead to the Assumption of Mary, a doctrine for which the passage is often cited.

The end times began in Mary’s lifetime. The “end times” is everything & every time, since Christ returned to Heaven, sending the Holy Spirit.
The “end times” get referred to like they were some special, mystic happening in the future. Not true. We have been in the “end times” ever since the coming of the Messiah, His death & resurrection, & His return to Heaven. The end times have been going on for a couple thousand years now.